Il n'y a pas de commentaires associés a cet article. Vous pouvez réagir.
1387Un nouveau site consacré à la publicité de documents secrets est sur le point d’être lancé, par un groupe d’anciens de WikiLeaks (dont l’ancien porte-parole de WikiLeaks, Daniel Domscheit-Berg ) qui ont rompu avec Assange pour des raisons de mésententes personnelles et méthodologiques. Le nouveau site (http://www.openleaks.org/) est présenté sur le site Threat Level, le 15 décembre 2010.
La présentation se fait sous un jour très favorable, implicitement critique des méthodes d’Assange et d’Assange lui-même, avec son prétendu “culte de la personnalité”.
OpenLeaks «aims to avoid the “cult of personality” that has arisen around WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, and the controversies and legal pressures his leadership has attracted. It will place editorial control of leaks in the hands of established journalists, rather than acting as a publisher itself. […]
»Unlike WikiLeaks, OpenLeaks will not publish documents. Instead, it will operate as an online dropbox, creating an infrastructure to deliver documents securely and anonymously directly to journalists and other outlets — such as human rights organizations, labor unions, non-governmental oversight groups — that choose to participate.
»Sources will not be able to submit documents directly through the OpenLeaks website. Instead, participating media outlets and others will be able to include links on their websites for submissions that will be delivered through the OpenLeaks-designed architecture.
»The plan is similar to a failed proposal that WikiLeaks had submitted to the Knight Foundation News Challenge grant in 2009. WikiLeaks had sought $530,000 from the foundation to build an anonymous submission system that would be linked through local newspaper websites, allowing sources to submit documents related to local issues. The receiving newspaper would have exclusive access to the documents for a period of time before WikiLeaks published the documents on its own website. The Knight Foundation rejected the application. […]
»The organization’s structure means it will be a more silent partner in the distribution of leaks, not using the leaks to further personal political agendas, which Assange has been accused of doing with his organization.
» “To me the key element is that it introduces an accountable editorial ingredient into the publication process and that’s promising,” says Steve Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists, which also publishes leaked government documents.
»Aftergood has been critical of WikiLeaks for what he calls “information vandalism” — that is, publishing documents in violation of copyright law and publishing information that has seemingly little or no news value just because it can. […] “The OpenLeaks approach would presumably only lead to the publication of newsworthy material,” Aftergood says. “It would also exclude violations of personal privacy, libelous material, infringements on intellectual property and so forth, because the news organizations publishing the material would be in a position to exercise editorial control.” As a result, “it may prove to be both more politically palatable and more resistant to external controversy,” says Aftergood.»
Une voix discordante est citée dans ce commentaire élogieux consacré à OpenLeaks. Elle concerne notamment l’argument selon lequel le “culte de la personnalité” est combattu, cela comme critique indirect d’Assange mais aussi comme argument contre l'efficacité de WikiLeaks…
«New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen says the latter may not be a good thing because Assange’s personality may be part of what draws sources to release documents to WikiLeaks. He says WikiLeaks’ success is based on an implied contract it has with sources that it will provide them with a secure, anonymous channel for submitting documents, and will then make sure their submissions are published and seen.
»“We don’t know how much of the power in that promise is in fact a result of Assange and his public advocacy and the very strong stands that he sometimes takes,” Rosen told Threat Level. “It’s possible that OpenLeaks won’t be as attractive to sources. On the other hand, it might be more so. The sources will decide what method is more effective.”»
dedefensa.org
-
